A "rolling average" multiple adaptive planning method to compensate for target volume changes in image-guided radiotherapy of prostate cancer

Impact of Acquisition Protocols on Accuracy of Dose Calculation Based on XVI Cone Beam Computed Tomography

Purpose:

The objective of this work is to study the impact of acquisition protocols on the accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based dose calculation and to determinate its limits from image characteristics such as image quality, Hounsfield numbers consistency, and restrictive sizes of volume acquisition, compared to the CT imaging for the different anatomy localizations: head and neck (H&N), thorax, and pelvis.

Materials and Methods:

In this work, we used a routine on-board imaging CBCT of the XVI system (Elekta, Stockholm, Sweden). Dosimetric calculations performed on CT images require the knowledge of the Hounsfield unit-relative electron density (HU-ReD) calibration curve, which is determined for each imaging technology and must be adapted to the imaging acquisition parameters (filter/field of view). The accuracy of the dose calculation from CBCT images strongly depends on the quality of these images and also on the appropriate correspondence to the electronic densities, which will be used by the treatment planning system to simulate the dose distribution. In this study, we evaluated the accuracy of the dose calculation for each protocol, as already pointed in many studies.

Results:

As a result, the protocols that give better results in terms of dose calculation are F0S20 for the H&N region and F1M20 for the thoracic and pelvic regions, with an error <2% compared to results obtained with CT images. In addition, the dose distributions obtained with CT and CBCT imaging modalities were compared by two different methods. The first comparison was done by gamma index in three planes (sagittal, coronal, and transverse) with 2%; 2 mm criteria. The results showed good correspondence, with more than 95% of points passed the criteria. We also compared the target volume, the organs at risk (OARs), and the maximum and minimum doses for the three localizations (H&N, thorax, and pelvis) in CT and CBCT imaging modalities using a Rando phantom.

Conclusions:

The choice of the adequate CBCT acquisition protocol and the appropriate phantom to determine the HU-ReD calibration curve provides a better precision in the calculation of dose on CBCT images. This allows improving the results obtained when using the HU-ReD calibration method for dose calculation in adaptive radiotherapy.

What benefit could be derived from on-line adaptive prostate radiotherapy using rectal diameter as a predictor of motion?

This study investigated a relationship between rectum diameter and prostate motion during treatment with a view to reducing planning target volume (PTV) margins for an adaptive protocol. One hundred and ninety-four cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of 10 patients were used to relate rectum diameter on CBCT to prostate intrafraction displacement. A threshold rectum diameter was used to model the impact of an adaptive PTV margin on rectum and bladder dose. Potential dose escalation with a 6 mm uniform margin adaptive protocol was compared to a PTV margin of 10 mm expansion of the clinical target volume (CTV) except 6 mm posterior. Of 194 fractions, 104 had a maximum rectal diameter of ≤3.5 cm. The prostate displaced ≤4 mm in 102 of those fractions. Changing from a standard to an adaptive PTV margin reduced the volume of rectum receiving 25, 50, 60, and 70 Gy by around 12, 9, 10, and 16%, respectively and bladder by approximately 21, 27, 29, and 35%, respectively. An average dose escalation of 4.2 Gy may be possible with an adaptive prostate radiotherapy protocol. In conclusion, a relationship between the prostate motion and the diameter of the rectum on CBCT potentially could enable daily adaptive radiotherapy which can be implemented from the first fraction.

A framework for deformable image registration validation in radiotherapy clinical applications

Quantitative validation of deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms is extremely difficult because of the complexity involved in constructing a deformable phantom that can duplicate various clinical scenarios. The purpose of this study is to describe a framework to test the accuracy of DIR based on computational modeling and evaluating using inverse consistency and other methods. Three clinically relevant organ deformations were created in prostate (distended rectum and rectal gas), head and neck (large neck flexion), and lung (inhale and exhale lung volumes with variable contrast enhancement) study sets. DIR was performed using both B-spline and diffeomorphic demons algorithms in the forward and inverse direction. A compositive accumulation of forward and inverse deformation vector fields was done to quantify the inverse consistency error (ICE). The anatomical correspondence of tumor and organs at risk was quantified by comparing the original RT structures with those obtained after DIR. Further, the physical characteristics of the deformation field, namely the Jacobian and harmonic energy, were computed to quantify the preservation of image topology and regularity of spatial transformation obtained in DIR. The ICE was comparable in prostate case but the B-spline algorithm had significantly better anatomical correspondence for rectum and prostate than diffeomorphic demons algorithm. The ICE was 6.5 mm for demons algorithm for head and neck case when compared to 0.7 mm for B-spline. Since the induced neck flexion was large, the average Dice similarity coefficient between both algorithms was only 0.87, 0.52, 0.81, and 0.67 for tumor, cord, parotids, and mandible, respectively. The B-spline algorithm accurately estimated deformations between images with variable contrast in our lung study, while diffeomorphic demons algorithm led to gross errors on structures affected by contrast variation. The proposed framework offers the application of known deformations on any image datasets, to evaluate the overall accuracy and limitations of a DIR algorithm used in radiation oncology. The evaluation based on anatomical correspondence, physical characteristics of deformation field, and image characteristics can facilitate DIR verification with the ultimate goal of implementing adaptive radiotherapy. The suitability of application of a particular evaluation metric in validating DIR is dependent on the clinical deformation observed.